If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

But it is not the best desktop for everyone, and THIS is the mistake GNOME is making. When millions of people do not like their decisions, they wage a war on users. That's silly.

I don't like any of the default desktop experiences, actually. Gnome Shell and Unity are simply awkward for me and I do not want to use my computer like that. I don't like the default KDE experience either, but the catch is that I can configure it to work exactly the way I want. And the way it should be. KDE got a lot of flack for attitudes like this, actually, when KDE 4 was first released. But they listened to the users and brought back the options people wanted.

If GNOME continues the current path, they will fade into obscurity. They've nuked more than half of their userbase in a span of a few years. That's not good management.

Comment

One thing I hate is how he talk's about working together on topic of GNOME OS and with all topics in common: he says nothing about it.
He allways says we, but not how working together on things(with other DE projects), epecially on things that were talked about in the topic GNOME OS : the things below GNOME. I think GNOME shoud try to work more together with KDE and such, a good example is the StatusNotifier stuff.

Comment

Couldn't take more than the first 7 minutes, he's basically debunking the "myth" that Gnome 3 is bad, with the same old silly half truths: people don't like new things, people are emotional, yada yada, a demagogy based on half truths and euphemisms with the usual reasons from the Gnome camp: it's not Gnome 3, it's the users who "don't get it".

I could only make it to 6 minutes when he started saying that the haters didn't give any specifics about why they hated it, and that maybe they hadn't even used it.

Comment

and after doing so, it just makes the comments on this thread even more humorous. Most of the haters here are just parroting the same uninformed stupidity that was being debunked in the video. Whatever though. Haters gonna hate. I'm quite happy with the GNOME desktop, and for me at least, it's better than any of the other options currently available.

Comment

I do not want to leave the design, programming and writing documents for play Angry Birds on tabF**

Spoke for Gnome.....Leave desktop

Do you have a complete system to compete with companies provide applications with hardware...؟
Return to reality....Who are using Gnome...؟؟؟؟؟ Give me a company that Provider tablets with gnome

and after doing so, it just makes the comments on this thread even more humorous. Most of the haters here are just parroting the same uninformed stupidity that was being debunked in the video. Whatever though. Haters gonna hate. I'm quite happy with the GNOME desktop, and for me at least, it's better than any of the other options currently available.

Do you work hard on the computer..
Just browsing or playing

A typical iCrap user.

The moon larger than the moon

Comment

This video left me seriously disappointed. I thought "oh, someone from Gnome, at a conference. This will probably be enlightening". Turns out I was wrong. He went on to say Gnome 2 was ok, but that is was "old" and the community wanted to do something new, so keep improving or making incremental changes to 2 was out of the question. That's it. I've heard better reasoning for Gnome 3 reading /. flame wars. Really. He asks the audience if they thought Gnome 3.0 was ready for users. When pretty much everyone disagrees, he says "well, it's a matter of point of view, and I thought it was ready, so there. Myth debunked. Next.". Really, I don't dislike Gnome 3 with passion or anything, but this whole video was so uninformative it's actually amazing. The part about removing features (edit: about 8 minutes in the video) is jaw-dropping. He says it's a myth that they keep removing features because they decide a certain way is best and so they take configurability away from the UI. That's what removing features is, how can he say it's a myth? He's affirming what he's supposedly denying!

Comment

Take a fucking hint, I said half truths. Everything can be and has been promoted with half truths, even vista and win8. Half truths are the catch all excuse - users don't like new things, nor understand them - aha, so it's not vista to blame, it's users who don't yet get it. Same with that gnome asshole from the video, he's even lying about not removing features while removing title buttons, shutdown option hidden/removed. And yes, you can bring features back, or better yet, fork the project and put them back there by default and don't make idiotic assumptions any longer, like that the user shouldn't shutdown their computers.

Look the point is, aside from asinine stuff like removing buttons from the title bar, the Gnome devs did a _bad_ job of making it tablet/phone/touch friendly at the expense of the desktop, that's the crux of the matter. Unity did the same thing by damaging the desktop experience less than Gnome 3.